[Petrochemicals (OP)]

Once again, I can't go for an unnecessary drive in a car, can't play golf, can't go and see someone else in their garden, yet I can go indoors to a church, can send a child to nursery, and can order from the internet businesses with industrial sweatshops. It was the same a month ago, during the last lockdown, which strangely enough failed to dent the spread of corona. It is a complete waste of my time, and is patently unfair. At least this time they have bothered to shut the schools.

[evan_au]

can send a child to nursery, .... At least this time they have bothered to shut the schools.

If (as claimed), this new COVID strain is more efficient at infecting children, then closing schools and nursery care may become necessary, otherwise these will turn into virus-spreading hubs.
- It will be difficult to get 2 year-old children to wear a mask consistently
- but it may be possible - I don't know that anyone has really tried
- You could turn it into a game!

[Bored chemist]

It was the same a month ago, during the last lockdown, which strangely enough failed to dent the spread of corona.

Got evidence for that?

[alancalverd]

Not sure about "sweatshops". The whole point of online business is that fewer people distribute more goods, customers are physically segregated from staff, and the handling process involves minimal human contact, so there is less likelihood of anyone infecting anyone else for a given volume of trade. 

The reason for taking lockdown seriously is that it will kill most retail businesses permanently and change the shape of cities.

[Petrochemicals (OP)]

can send a child to nursery, .... At least this time they have bothered to shut the schools.

If (as claimed), this new COVID strain is more efficient at infecting children, then closing schools and nursery care may become necessary, otherwise these will turn into virus-spreading hubs.
- It will be difficult to get 2 year-old children to wear a mask consistently
- but it may be possible - I don't know that anyone has really tried
- You could turn it into a game!

I don't think masks are a factor when children of that age are exploring with their mouths, Boris has 5 children, how does he not know that children lick everything and that they have runny noses that they wipe everywhere on a pretty much weekly basis? The schools are pretty much open anyway.

https://www.itv.com/news/2021-01-08/covid-concerns-over-lack-of-school-spaces-for-key-workers-children

Not sure about "sweatshops". The whole point of online business is that fewer people distribute more goods, customers are physically segregated from staff, and the handling process involves minimal human contact, so there is less likelihood of anyone infecting anyone else for a given volume of trade. 

The reason for taking lockdown seriously is that it will kill most retail businesses permanently and change the shape of cities.

you can still get on a bus and go to work painting houses or something like that. So can children.

https://www.citb.co.uk/about-citb/news-events-and-blogs/uk/2021/01/citb-coronavirus-response-chief-exec-update-6-january-2021/

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3061338/amp/Sports-Direct-branded-sweatshop-working-conditions-compared-Victorian-era-bosses-accused-punishing-employees-talk.html

But still I can't go and play golf outdoors for a few hours a week in a car after isolating all week and being careful. Why should I bother?

[Petrochemicals (OP)]

Still a waste of time.

[evan_au]

Why should I be bothered with lockdown?

Because it's one of the most effective ways to slow the spread of the virus.
- And that's one of the most effective ways to ensure that there are spare ICU beds if/when you need one.

Or you could just be interested in not getting a fine
- Or having some "me" time

There are numerous ways to run a lockdown:
- If people have been exposed to a known infected carrier, there is really no substitute for them staying indoors for 14 days, in their own home (and someone checking up on them periodically). With a test to show that they aren't infected at the end.
- If it's just an attempt to reduce virus spread, then allowing people to go outside for an hour of exercise or shopping per day is an acceptable risk. But a wearing mask is important*
- Reducing the distance that people are allowed to travel in their hour of freedom reduces the speed of spread through a city.
- There must be exceptions for "essential workers" and medical appointments. There are endless variations on how that is interpreted.

* Masks were only made mandatory last week in my state - and that applies if you go to an indoor location like a shop or a church

PS: As the Roman poet Juvenal said, people mostly want bread and circuses:
- There needs to be some financial support during lockdown, so people can buy food (eg bread)
- NETFLIX (and similar services) provide the entertainment (circuses)
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses

[alancalverd]

One reason that the epidemic has spread slightly more slowly in the USA than the UK, despite the best efforts of gun-toting idiots to infect as many people as possible, is the lack of intercity commuting. It has thus been possible, at least in principle, to isolate areas of high incidence without travel bans because nobody commutes regularly between, say Chicago and New York. But frequent travel for business or pleasure between, say, Birmingham and Bristol is no big deal - indeed part of the daily or weekly grind for many people - so a pool of infection in one city can become a source in another.   

[Petrochemicals (OP)]

Still Pointless


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av-embeds/55668521/vpid/p09410yt

[alancalverd]

Still Pointless

...said the lemming to the parachute salesman.

[Petrochemicals (OP)]

Still Pointless

...said the lemming to the parachute salesman.

Well Boris is flogging ones made out of sieves

[Bored chemist]

Still Pointless

...said the lemming to the parachute salesman.

Well Boris is flogging ones made out of sieves

LOL
Early parachutes were made from cloth- full of holes.
But they worked.

[alancalverd]

And made worse by idiots shooting at it as they descend.

[Petrochemicals (OP)]

And made worse by idiots shooting at it as they descend.

Unfortunately they are not descending just yet, just gaining altitude at a slower rate.

From London the place that is shipping its patients to other areas to fill their hospitals up too, the R rate is now at "only" ~1.05~ after a month of lockdown, great, soon other peoples hospitals will be full, London leads the rest of the country is impinge upon. A dangerous waste of time.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55676639

[alancalverd]

A dangerous waste of time.

So you would prefer a larger value of R? What would be your preferred value?

R for London fell gradually to 1 in early December but rose rapidly everywhere as soon as Christmas was Saved, reaching 1.35 in London by 23 December. Best current estimate is 1.05. So lockdown does exactly what it is supposed to do: reduce R.

Interestingly, the current value for London is lower than any other statistical region, but we mustn't let facts cloud a good rant, must we?

[Petrochemicals (OP)]

A dangerous waste of time.

So you would prefer a larger value of R? What would be your preferred value?

after a month I'd expect a bit more, time is finite Alan, so are hospital resources,

R for London fell gradually to 1 in early December but rose rapidly everywhere as soon as Christmas was Saved, reaching 1.35 in London by 23 December. Best current estimate is 1.05. So lockdown does exactly what it is supposed to do: reduce R.

your answer belies the fact that it is still increasing but time and hospital places are not, infections usually dip over holiday periods and pick up afterwards

Interestingly, the current value for London is lower than any other statistical region, but we mustn't let facts cloud a good rant, must we?

Evidently not

[alancalverd]

your answer belies the fact that it is still increasing

Date                R _London
11/12              1.0
18/12              1.2
23/12              1.4
08/01              1.3
15/01              1.1

looks to me as though it increased when lockdown was lifted, and is now decreasing. These figures obviously underestimate the decrease because they are necessarily retrospective: the number published each Friday represents what actually happened in the previous 7 days. But then I have the political disadvantage of being numerate.

infections usually dip over holiday periods and pick up afterwards

I know of no data that supports your argument. We know that reported deaths decrease during short holiday periods and spike immediately afterwards, because registries close for public holidays and publish numbers for the dates that the reports are filed, not the reported date of death.

All the current evidence and knowledge gained since the days of Pasteur and Semmelweiss suggests that infections increase during holidays because people travel and meet.  But then I'm only a clinical scientist - what do I know about clinical science?

[alancalverd]

Interestingly, the current value for London is lower than any other statistical region, but we mustn't let facts cloud a good rant, must we?]

Evidently not

Current best estimates of R
London      East      Midland      NE/Yorks     NW       SE     SW
1.1             1.2          1.3               1.2            1.4        1.1      1.4

[alancalverd]

time is finite

As far as we know, time is at least semi-infinite, having started at the Big Bang if not before, and having no obvious endpoint.

[Bored chemist]

R rate is now at "only" ~1.05~ after a month of lockdown,

Christmas happened in the last month, so we have not had a month of lockdown. We have probably has the largest  event of people moving round the country since the first lockdown.

Why do you even try to base your arguments on assertions that are clearly false?